Talk:Greater Oceana
Sloboda! Sloboda! Dr. Magnus 20:22, October 10, 2010 (UTC) :Oslobodenia o'that sacker narod :) Bucu 20:22, October 10, 2010 (UTC) Wishettek dobrar than issin Lovish! Dr. Magnus 20:27, October 10, 2010 (UTC) :Dober lad! :D Thu epostvit de resume, oshine upriser :) Bucu 20:31, October 10, 2010 (UTC) ::The Theo-fascist Independent Republic of Greater-Oceana?! 05:44, October 13, 2010 (UTC) :::No, let's keep it to the theo'cratic' Greater-Oceana :) --OuWTBsjrief-mich 06:19, October 13, 2010 (UTC) ::::Using the criteria put forth by Umberto Eco in his Eternal Fascism (link to pdf) you can see common characteristics: ::::* Combining cultural syncretism with a rejection of modernism ::::* Anti-intellectualism manifested in attacks on modern culture and science ::::* Devaluation of intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as 'treason' ::::* Obsession with a plot and the hyping-up of an enemy threat ::::All these are present in the discourse and thought of the 'defenders of the traditional Oceana'. Of course a lot is still missing like the appeal on the middle class for instance or the belief that life is war. Most of these lacks are caused by religious influence, hence the 'theo' in theo-fascism. 07:07, October 13, 2010 (UTC) :::::Can you show me anything of point 2 and 3? --OuWTBsjrief-mich 14:26, October 13, 2010 (UTC) ::::They can't. As of point 1 and 2, they are perfectly harmless and very common in politics. Dr. Magnus 18:08, October 13, 2010 (UTC) :::::Sure I can; here we go: :::::* Oceana is an amalgam of cultures of which several Slavic ones (= cultural syncretism) and opposes modernist views (see: wikipedia on postmodern ideas) :::::* This is just the definition of conservatism; defending 'morals from the past' and reject the logical arguments that are brought in against them on irrational grounds. :::::* Just read the party program of the CCPL and you'll see what I mean. I know it is a testimonial party but religious people tend to regard non-believers as heretics or traitors. Also, they use a fucked-up (in this case theological) discourse instead of an intellectual/scientific one which they deem 'dangerous' or 'mind-poisoning'. :::::* The current upheaval in nationalism/conservatism is because the minority feels threatened (see: State Election results in Oceana). :::::@Pierius: You see I can. Those tendencies are indeed present in various movements and of different strength, but they are not harmless. They are a danger to critical thought and thus in fact democracy itself. If God/the state/tradition is everything, man is nothing. 06:29, October 15, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Note to yourselves, for better use in the future: never dare Yuri to do something. The few things he has said to me that sounded unfounded, were either perfectly founded or so funny they didn't need foundation. 14:59, October 15, 2010 (UTC) :::::Yuri is an awfully smart and belezen guy, but truly we cannot be, as he claims, fascists if we admire him for it. Which I do. After all, fascism is anti- intellectual, but since we have no Stalins or Maos within our party... Dr. Magnus 15:34, October 15, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Can I ask a question? Eco defines syncretism (for his purposes) as "the combination of different forms of belief or practice". Isn't Oceanan culture syncretic only in language / customs? I mean, in "belief and practice" they're just plain old Catholics. --Semyon 16:29, October 15, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Maybe amish Kinley should have been amish Hurbanova beacuse Oceana is afraid of progressives. Marcus Villanova 21:37, October 15, 2010 (UTC) :::::::@Semyon: Sure you can. I think you might want to re-read the essay because it actually says the following: ::::::::Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, "the combination of different forms of belief or practice"; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a silver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth. :::::::Eco defines the syncretism as 'a cult of tradition'; the adoration of Tradition (with a capital) as opposed to progressive views if you want. :::::::@Pierius: I never claimed this movement was nazist or corporatist or any other thing associated with WWII fascism. Nazism is - just like the Greater Oceana movement - a 'form of appearance' of what Eco calls Ur-fascism, a certain tendency in human thought which was present long before WWII. 09:13, October 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Indeed it has been present long before WWII; take a look at the ancient Greeks prior to Solon and you'll see. Maybe this is because democracy is not always the best solution, as the United States tend to think. You see, democracy only works in rich nation in which people have enough to eat and a roof over their heads. If not, then radical movements appear. Louis the First of Bourbon ruled France as a dictator, never called together the peoples representatives. Still he was popular, you know why? Because he fed the people and so they were happy. As were the Roman citizens under the combined consulship of Crassus and Pompey Magnus, because they fed them with free grain. Feed the people, make the masses happy, and they will praise you and let you rule them. In Iraq, sure, the people were glad Saddam Hussein was driven out. But does democracy really work for them? A lot of the problems still excist. Because the way you govern a wealthy nation does not neccisarily work in another nation aswell. There are cultural differences and differences in social status, customs and traditions. As is the case in Oceana, a state with many poor miners. Our ideoligy works here better then it would in, say, Sylvania or Seven were the population is wealthier. Dr. Magnus 09:21, October 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::::::This seems like an over-simplification but I see what you mean. It can however not explain my kind of politics - the appeal of intellectual socialism. Democracy might not work in itself but you can make it work by emancipating the masses. Education, social programs and democracy are a golden trio. It is way better then the populist oppression of the people by keeping them in the dark. It is a cliché, but democracy is a verb. 09:27, October 16, 2010 (UTC) :::::::Then at least introduce democracy gradually, and not by force. If you educate your people bright minds arise, the masses will no longer be a bunch of brainless, speechless sheep. But never try to force people into copying your beliefs and ruling their country the way you want them to. You know why democracy would not work in Iraq or Afghanistan, and does not work? Because people are still mostly poor and uneducated and so they sell their votes to the highest bidder and so always the same corrupt and wealthy people get to rule the nation. Nothing changes, only on the surface but not in reality. Because the people were not educated and the process of democratization was too sudden. Dr. Magnus 09:34, October 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Democracy is just a fancy word. It took 200 years for it to work (more or less) in the USA and still has its flaws. People with the most votes get to rule and govern the people, but are they the best, most qualified people? Hell no! A theocracy is the best way to rule people or even an enlightened absolute monarch. Dr. Magnus 09:37, October 16, 2010 (UTC) :::::::Traditionalism, nationalism and religious politics work against emancipation and only lead to slavery. Capitalist democracy (like in the US) is very unstable and is very likely to lead towards a form of fascism (position of religion, Tea Party bullshit). Authoritarianism is no solution, just fully implement democracy and then you get socialism. 09:41, October 16, 2010 (UTC) :::::The ideal form of government does not excist. Every form has its flaws, some more then others. I do, however, have a very clear view of what is not the ideal form which is, as you said, capitalist democracy. Neither is oldskool fascism or communism. It would be a mixture of many forms. Dr. Magnus 09:48, October 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I'm not saying democratic socialism is perfect, not that you can build it in one night. It asks for years of emancipation and a strong democracy. A system of democracy, where the power lies with the people, is however the only justifiable form of government. 09:51, October 16, 2010 (UTC) :::::::Ok, Yuri went seriously astray here (for once). To call Oceana fascist because it has a 'syncretist culture' is about as sensible as saying Mexicans are predisposed to fascism because they have mixed ethnic origins. Taking Nazism as an example (because I know most about it): they had a syncretist belief structure because it combined elements of Christianity, as part of the traditional German culture which they tried to preserve, elements of Germanic paganism, which they were rather more enthusiastic about, and modern pseudo-scientific ideologies like social Darwinism. That's fascism. Just having a mixed-up language doesn't qualify. --Semyon 18:25, June 16, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::Fascism is badly over-hyped. The glorious First Consul of Rome 18:51, June 16, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::Actually citing religion as part of fascism.. As far as I know, fascism is anti-religious :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 19:54, June 16, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::They tend to be really big on 'tradition' so often at first support institutions such as the church. But then they realise that it offers an alternative power centre and different political vision, and as they want to concentrate power in their own hands they become more anti-religious. At least according to what I was taught in history. :P --Semyon 20:50, June 16, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::Sounds logic :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 21:11, June 16, 2012 (UTC)